“Rape is worse than murder”

[Notorious_1676]

Cop out, didnt address any of my points nor is your framework proveable, i even admitted that yes the studies are a bit faulty but every study done on the matter contradicts or goes against your view

You admitted that he studies are faulty yet you still proivded them as evidence. You were hoping that writing a wall of text that you yourself don't even believe would stop me from responding. And I'll repeat myself again.

The evidence for this topic is inconsistent. How do we know that the date that claims that only 2 Women orgasmed is true? The Women could be ashamed of orgasming so they kept quite about it, I don't think it's a secret how secretive Women are about their nature. Penetration is the quickest way possible for a Woman to orgasm biologically. You really think only 2/250 of them would cum and only 65 would report some form of sexual arousal?

There are so so many posts where Women admit to enjoying getting raped, sexually assaulted, being attatched to their rapist/abuser and reading books about rape yet you think that most of them don't experience any form of sexual arousal when they're getting pentrated?

The most you can respond to this is by holding on to the hope that the evidence the study provided about such a sensitive topic is the truth. And the studies are more than just a bit faulty, their own biology is proof that this study is completely false. Your only argument is "muh my study has more proof even though the so called proof is extremely illogical and incorrect statistically, logically and biologically so what you said is wrong" It's impossible that only 2/250 women would cum from getting raped by penetration and that's including the Rapist ejaculating quickly since he has no impulse control and will most likely not last a long time. Imagine the percentage of women that would cum if they were to get raped by an Average Man let alone a semi attractive one.

the nazis were the good guys in that war and you are trying to justify marxist communists terrorizing innocents when the vast majority of the french public supported petain and vichy, especially since actual french nationalists served in the Waffen-SS and died fighting till the last man in the battle of berlin like actual heroes as opposed to the cowards of the resistance

I said that Women are treacherous by nature and betrayed their own Men and your response is that i'm trying to justify Marxist communists terrorizing innocents (not that Normies are innocent but ok)? And you're also one of those bluepilled retards that thinks fighting in wars for a country and family that will forget you and those who have done the same before you is "heroic". And the Women didn't pick based of morals, they just saw Men who conquered their own and saw them as superior. How would they even know anywhere near as much information as we do on the war? It'd be practically impossible and we both know Women aren't intelligent nor objective enough to have come to the conclusions that the Germans were in the right.

Also even if we use your french example (ignoring for the sake of the argument that the gemrans were heroes), i can list plenty more in which women did the opposite, during the anglo-boer wars women who were put in concentration camps refused to betray their people or nation, they would shame men who surrended or collaborated and would smuggle messages from the concentration camps they were held in to tell their husbands to not let the british holding them hostage make them surrender and to fight on regardless of them being in captivity, they actively chose to endure concentration camps over collaborative peace with the british, we see this same trait happen within the peninsular wars when spanish women helped poison food to french troops and actively helped guerilla fighters, during the siege of Zaragoza the women did not evacuate and even actively helped man cannons after male gunners were killed and helped organize ammunition logistics, barricades and engaging in close quaters warfare and actively refusing french terms of surrender, you are a retard trying to use one historical example to paint one pattern (which you have no evidence to back it up with via studies or anything) and then ignoring multiple examples when they have done the opposite @Notorious_1676

There were 8000-9000 french women deported to Nazi concentration camps and there are claims of a couple of hundred thousand French women escaping the country which we don't know whether is true or not since it's such a huge number. The same Germans who allegedly had 6 million Jews in the Holocaust (they didn't) but the fact that the Jews were confident enough to tell such a huge lie about the number of Jews killed in the concentration camp is proof that they easily could have had far more women in those concentration camps yet they only had 8-0 thousand. What about the other 21.5 million French Women? You're fixating on a small group of Women that didn't back down and applying it to millions.

And the women smuggling messaes were held hostage for the sake of being held hostage.

And when I said Women are naturally treacherous by nature and want to be conquered aka raped hence why they tend to orgasm from it. Your immediate response is to go back a couple hundred years to pick specific examples of Women not immediately sacrificing everyone for themselves when we see it with our own eyes everyday. If a large sum of them were so loyal then why did they all have their rights restricted? Maybe it's because the vast majority of them are no where near as loyal as the Women that you picked out for your examples. They're exceptions to the rule, not the rule

There's a huge reason as to why the Jews who happen to be extremely intelligent are pushing for Women to be in positions of power, the same Women who defend Murders and Criminals and even help break them out of jail. I could easily pretend to be just as retarded as you are and use examples of hundreds of thousands of Women thirsting over murders, rapists, school shooters and the female police office who broke out a rapist from jail and the Women who wanted to marry Ted Bundy and the other Woman who married a Rapist despite being a psychologist

 

[Hess]

You admitted that he studies are faulty yet you still proivded them as evidence. You were hoping that writing a wall of text that you yourself don't even believe would stop me from responding. And I'll repeat myself again.

The evidence for this topic is inconsistent. How do we know that the date that claims that only 2 Women orgasmed is true? The Women could be ashamed of orgasming so they kept quite about it, I don't think it's a secret how secretive Women are about their nature. Penetration is the quickest way possible for a Woman to orgasm biologically. You really think only 2/250 of them would cum and only 65 would report some form of sexual arousal?

Misunderstanding what i meant, I never said that the studies are faulty in to the point of it being useless but that even the authors themselves said so explicitly that they acknowledge the limitations of the evidence, thats how all reasearch works this doesnt prove your opposite worldview just because they admit that there is some fault in some areas, also the study is a scoping review, meaning it summarizes existing literature, it never claimed "only 2 out of every 250 rape victim orgasms" but that in the study there were only two reported cases of oragasms recorded, also you commit a logical fallacy with this point of that the could of been too ashamed to report it, sure it is a possible reality that could of happened but theories about possible underreporting are not evidence that the real number was actually higher and they all lied, i can invent hidden numbers for any studies I dislike but the burden is on you to actually prove the claim with actual data that underreporting is large enough to support your claim and not just pointless speculation that it might have happened, also the data they used was not just recorded interviews but also clinical records as well as observations from clinicans over the course of 8 articles and 1 book, you try to use possible claims of underreporting as proof that your claim is actually true LOL

There are so so many posts where Women admit to enjoying getting raped, sexually assaulted, being attatched to their rapist/abuser and reading books about rape yet you think that most of them don't experience any form of sexual arousal when they're getting pentrated?

Ok bro and there is so many posts about X person doing Y thing, youre an actual retard if you think your personal observations are more valid than studies that actually actively record it, this is a retarded fallacy

The most you can respond to this is by holding on to the hope that the evidence the study provided about such a sensitive topic is the truth. And the studies are more than just a bit faulty, their own biology is proof that this study is completely false. Your only argument is "muh my study has more proof even though the so called proof is extremely illogical and incorrect logically and biologically so what you said is wrong"

except you don't use any evidence or actual studies for your claims, you rely on vague retarded evopsych nonsense and try to make out as if studies which themselves acknowledge limitations are less valid than your retarded speculations which you do not use any opposing evidence or studies to back it up yourself as you are an intellectually lazy fag

I said that Women are treacherous by nature and betrayed their own Men and your response is that i'm trying to justify Marxist communists terrorizing innocents (not that Normies are innocent but ok)? And you're also one of those bluepilled retards that thinks fighting in wars for a country and family that will forget you and those who have done the same before you is "heroic". And the Women didn't pick based of morals, they just saw Men who conquered their own and saw them as superior. How would they even know anywhere near as much information as we do on the war? It'd be practically impossible and we both know Women aren't intelligent nor objective enough to have come to the conclusions that the Germans were in the right.

My point is that the vast majority of the french public were collaborative or even supportive of the nazis, not just women, and that the resistance themselves were more of a minority,

There were 8000-9000 french women deported to Nazi concentration camps and there are claims of a couple of hundred thousand French women escaping the country which we don't know whether is true or not since it's such a huge number. The same Germans who allegedly had 6 million Jews in the Holocaust (they didn't) but the fact that the Jews were confident enough to tell such a huge lie about the number of Jews killed in the concentration camp is proof that they easily could have had far more women in those concentration camps yet they only had 8-0 thousand. What about the other 21.5 million French Women? You're fixating on a small group of Women that didn't back down and applying it to millions.

And the women smuggling messaes were held hostage for the sake of being held hostage.

Holy shit are you retarded? im talking abt the fucking anglo-boer wars not world war 2 you actual retarded monkey I never said a thing abt french concentration camps or whatever, the concentration camps were invented as a concept in the second boer war by the british jesus christ you cant even read or have any basic literacy, my point is that you try to use one historical example when there are multiple other historical examples operating in the opposite psychology with the examples that i listed with the anglo-boer wars and peninsular wars during the napoleonic period,im sure there are some other examples doing the opposite but there are multiple others doing the opposite of that,these things are extremely dependent on so many things to like national psychologies of a nation,how loyal and fervent is their culture, do they view themselves as commiting to a total war or political dispute, how religious they are etc etc

 

[Notorious_1676]

Misunderstanding what i meant, I never said that the studies are faulty in to the point of it being useless but that even the authors themselves said so explicitly that they acknowledge the limitations of the evidence, thats how all reasearch works this doesnt prove your opposite worldview just because they admit that there is some fault in some areas, also the study is a scoping review, meaning it summarizes existing literature, it never claimed "only 2 out of every 250 rape victim orgasms" but that in the study there were only two reported cases of oragasms recorded, also you commit a logical fallacy with this point of that the could of been too ashamed to report it, sure it is a possible reality that could of happened but theories about possible underreporting are not evidence that the real number was actually higher and they all lied, i can invent hidden numbers for any studies I dislike but the burden is on you to actually prove the claim with actual data that underreporting is large enough to support your claim and not just pointless speculation that it might have happened, also the data they used was not just recorded interviews but also clinical records as well as observations from clinicans over the course of 8 articles and 1 book, you try to use possible claims of underreporting as proof that your claim is actually true LOL

Ok bro and there is so many posts about X person doing Y thing, youre an actual retard if you think your personal observations are more valid than studies that actually actively record it, this is a retarded fallacy

except you don't use any evidence or actual studies for your claims, you rely on vague retarded evopsych nonsense and try to make out as if studies which themselves acknowledge limitations are less valid than your retarded speculations which you do not use any opposing evidence or studies to back it up yourself as you are an intellectually lazy fag

My point is that the vast majority of the french public were collaborative or even supportive of the nazis, not just women, and that the resistance themselves were more of a minority,

Holy shit are you retarded? im talking abt the fucking anglo-boer wars not world war 2 you actual retarded monkey I never said a thing abt french concentration camps or whatever, the concentration camps were invented as a concept in the second boer war by the british jesus christ you cant even read or have any basic literacy

You haven't even addressed the majority of my points and it's the 3rd time you've ignored that it's practically immpossible for a small group of Women to orgasm by being penetrated, I'll respond to you when you address every single one of my points like I did

Ok bro and there is so many posts about X person doing Y thing, youre an actual retard if you think your personal observations are more valid than studies tat actually actively record it, this is a retarded fallacy

Because those studies are dishonest so no shit I'm going to argue against them. You haven't tried rebutting the majority of my points that you know you can't rebut so you're specifically picking out the only arguments in which you can get a word in. I'm proud of you for being aware of your intellectual limits

 

[Deluxe4]

Think abt it like this, if you as a man were sodomized brutally by another man would you not feel such an intense shame and disgust from it for years until even on your deathbed? which is why a lot of people consider losing their autonomy and control over oneself as more valuable than even their life itself (historically societies used to commit suicide after dishonor and shame, as well as many preferring to kill themselves than let illness take their automony and sanity because they at least get to choose their death rather than deteriorate), perfectly valid to view rape as a crime equal to murder

id rather get graped by a guy than rope can't afford to lose my downturned medial canthus

 

[Hess]

You haven't even addressed the majority of my points and it's the 3rd time you've ignored that it's practically immpossible for a small group of Women to orgasm by being penetrated, I'll respond to you when you address every single one of my points like I did

List them out again and I will im not rereading through reply after reply

 

[Hess]

id rather get graped by a guy than rope can't afford to lose my downturned medial canthus

You probably just want to get raped by a guy period

 

[Hess]

Because those studies are dishonest so no shit I'm going to argue against them. You haven't tried rebutting the majority of my points that you know you can't rebut so you're specifically picking out the only arguments in which you can get a word in. I'm proud of you for being aware of your intellectual limits

Also dishonest lol? these studies explicitly admit limitations of their study and by no means try to champion it as the ultimate truth, im more than happy accepting the flaws with these studies but your fallacy is that you just because you can theorize abt possible underreporting or that actually every women that reported orgasmed does not make it true, if you actually want to prove that you cant just pick out flaws but actually have to use opposing data and evidence to back that view up as well, infact im more than happy to change my view on the topic if you actually list me studies or data that prove the opposite of them mostly orgasming, if you can actually list opposing data im more than happy to concede.

 

[Notorious_1676]

List them out again and I will im not rereading through reply after reply

Does it matter? We both know you won't respond to every point like I did because you yourself know that you're wrong, hence why you still haven't addressed my point about such a small amount of women orgasming by being penetrated which is biologically the quickest way for them to ejaculate and your response to me mentioning that there we only 8000-9000 french women in concentration camps is immediately deflecting "b-but we were taking about the anglo-boer war" as if I haven't addressed that point aswell. Every argument that got proven wrong you didn't even bother responding to whereas I responded to everything that you said. What's the point in engaging in conversation with a clown as dishonest as you?

 

[Hess]

Does it matter? We both know you won't respond to every point like I did because you yourself know that you're wrong, hence why you still haven't addressed my point about such a small amount of women orgasming by being penetrated which is biologically the quickest way for them to ejaculate

your claim that penetration is “the quickest way possible for a woman to orgasm” is simply not supported by any evidence or data. https://https//pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29079939/
you try to "disprove" my study by making a claim that doesnt have any backing to it what a disingenious "rebuttal"

your response to me mentioning that there we only 8000-9000 french women in concentration camps is immediately deflecting "b-but we were taking about the anglo-boer war" as if I haven't addressed that point aswell. Every argument that got proven wrong you didn't even bother responding to whereas I responded to everything that you said. What's the point in engaging in conversation with a clown as dishonest as you?

Because I never once mentioned french women in the concentration camps nor denied that they collaborated retard, I used different historical examples that showed a complete opposite course of action in women as way to show you that this sort of psychology is not the "norm" nor is it easy to just be able to use that one example to generalize all of historical behavior and your response is to ignore talking abt that by pretending i was trying to refute the claim that french women collaborated? JFL

 

[Hess]

your claim that penetration is “the quickest way possible for a woman to orgasm” is simply not supported by any evidence or data. https://https//pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29079939/
you try to "disprove" my study by making a claim that doesnt have any backing to it what a disingenious "rebuttal"


Because I never once mentioned french women in the concentration camps nor denied that they collaborated retard, I used different historical examples that showed a complete opposite course of action in women as way to show you that this sort of psychology is not the "norm" nor is it easy to just be able to use that one example to generalize all of historical behavior and your response is to ignore talking abt that by pretending i was trying to refute the claim that french women collaborated? JFL

link to study does not work, here is working link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29079939/